S3: A Theology of Mental Health

E3: The Seven Deadly Banana Skins and a Conscience Called Jiminy Cricket

Since I started to write about a Theology of Mental Health the number of questions and inquiries increased. Undoubtedly, it has little to do with me and more to do with the subject – it is a popular one. Added to its popularity, the subject of mental health is strictly a human one. I’m not suggesting animals don’t sense, feel, or have natural chemicals that balance biology; but as human beings we function far beyond environment and instinct.

So, in this blog, I would like to lighten the burden and focus on all of us as human beings. In what follows, it would be cruel and mean-spirited to focus on those who have been professionally diagnosed with this or that disorder, or even those who have self-diagnosed suspecting they have some sort of disfunction or syndrome.

At the same time, I do not want to give any impression of taking this popular and human subject lightly. Mental health is a serious matter, so a theology of mental health cannot be anything less than serious. That said, from time to time it is good to view our behavior in a humorous way. And, maybe in this present season of self-isolation it may be a good thing that we smile as our own mental health is challenged.

By humor, I mean serious things that can be addressed in a humorous way. For example, Christ said, “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?” (Matt. 7:3). Simply hilarious, but with a very serious social implication!

With this in mind, I want to approach mental health through the lens of The Seven Deadly Sins, or more directly, The Seven Deadly Banana Skins as Stephen Fry intimated in his recent podcast. It will become evident why banana skins are involved shortly.

Where did the list of deadly sins come from?

Though Aristotle (384-322 BC) spoke about vices and virtues, it was the fourth century monk Evagrius Ponticus (345–399 AD) that gave us a list of eight sins. He was a marvelous thinker and equally good in his oratory and wordsmith skills. Each sin he listed was moored in Scripture, but there is no such compiled list in the Old or New Testament, much like the seven sayings of Christ on the cross. None of the four gospel accounts mention all of them individually, but all seven sayings are found in the gospels as a collective work.  

It was not until Pope Gregory I (540-604 AD) that eight sins became seven. I guess the Supreme Pontiff wanted to economize and give Christians a break – or maybe not.       

The classic list of sins as we have come to know them today are pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath, and sloth. They were deemed as deadly simply because they were viewed as an excess of good things. We don’t hear these words too much today, and their meaning has drastically changed. So, how did Ponticus and Gregory define each sin compared to our current definition? What follows are broad definitions.  

Pride was defined as excessive belief in your own abilities compromising the grace of God, often called the sin from which all others arise also known as vanity. Today, pride is a narcissistic personality disorder.  

The definition of greed used to be an excessive desire for material wealth downplaying the richness of a spiritual life, also called avarice or covetousness. Today, we refer to it as a result of unresolved conflicts that preoccupy our thoughts.  

Lust was defined as the inordinate craving for the sexual pleasures of the body often carried out in a promiscuous way. Today, we call it sex addiction.

The definition of envy was a strong desire for the status, abilities, or situation of someone else. Today, envy is a socialist right and obligation – to want what others have, or even worse, to want what others have earned.   

Gluttony used to be defined as an excessive desire to consume more food and beverage than was necessary. The Romans carried this out with triumphant success in their food orgies. Today, gluttony is an eating disorder where an alarmingly increase of people die from being overfed catching up with death by malnutrition.[1]

The definition of wrath was defined as uncontrolled feelings of anger and rage, often driven by hatred and a desire to seek vengeance. Today, wrath is all about anger management.

Finally, sloth was defined as the avoidance of physical or spiritual work. Yes, spiritual work is a thing. It is the act of cultivating a relationship with God by reading Scripture, prayer, and helping others (thereby experiencing God as His hands and feet). Today, sloth is an attention deficit disorder, void of any physical or spiritual application.

Is it really helpful to reduce human behavior to disorders, dysfunctions, and syndromes? I think not. Is it helpful to host support groups to help people who cross the line from necessary to excessive? Yes, I think so, but such groups do not deliver, save, redeem, or free individuals.

When sin becomes a list of treatable behaviors, any need of redemption or salvation is redundant. If God is divorced from the human condition, why make any attempt towards a theology of mental health? Treatable behavior is the unaddressed banana skin that exists to simply trip people up in a moment of human pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath, and sloth.

When this happens, it is not funny, or is it? To be honest, there is nothing quite like watching someone literally glide horizontally through the air after engaging with the banana skin left on the floor! And, according to the new meaning attached to the sinful list, flying horizontally is never the individual’s fault for being prideful, greedy, lustful, envious, a glutton, wrathful, or slothful – it was the person who left the banana skin on the floor, right?

Can you see how this works today?

Treatable behaviors shift the blame onto something or someone else, or at the very least share the responsibility with something or someone else. Shifting the blame is to point at the banana skin and announce in the most accusatory tone – this is your fault!

When The Seven Deadly Sins metaphorically become The Seven Deadly Banana Skins any sense of personal responsibility can be pawned off to a syndrome, disfunction, or disorder. If the truth were ever told, there is some disfunction in all of us. Look, I am not saying that people who suffer with chronic anxiety or depression are somehow fobbing off personal responsibility. What I am strongly suggesting is that everyone else might be. But how?

Allow me to get back to the humor.

In 1881, the Italian author Carlo Collodi, published his full story of Pinocchio. In this enchanting tale of “what it is to be human” Collodi introduced Jiminy Cricket as the conscience of Pinocchio. In 1940, Walt Disney brought Pinocchio to life from pages to screen. In this animated version, Jiminy Cricket is appointed by the Blue Fairy to be the evolving boy’s conscience. Think about that, a wooden boy evolving into a real human being needed a conscience? It was no coincidence, then, that Cricket was dressed like a 19th century gentleman. Can you imagine if Cricket had been something like Fagin from Oliver Twist, Captain Barbossa from Pirates of the Caribbean, or Gordon Gekko from Wall Street? Pinocchio’s conscience would have been decidedly corrupted! As much as this seems humorous (like the example of Christ and the plank in the eye thing), something serious is being said.     

We all have a conscience. Traditionally, a human conscience is personified as an angel on one shoulder and a devil on the other. Both allegedly whisper into our ears. Among multitudes of fictitious characters that have been depicted with this dual persuasion, SpongeBob, Captain Jack Sparrow, and Bart Simpson are the most popular. Today, we tend to call these persuasive voices of vice and virtue schizophrenia or personality disorder.

See how that works again? Right or wrong, good or bad is now an idle banana skin waiting for the next foot to engage – and it is never our fault, right?

I like what Joe Carter from the Gospel Coalition has to say about conscience. He draws attention to five general themes in Scripture especially in St. Paul’s letters. Allow me to abbreviate.

First, conscience is our rational capacity that bears witness to our internal belief system.

Thinking of human conscience as animated characters on the left and right shoulder is simply not a biblical concept. It may be tradition, but it is not even moored in Scripture. Sorry Jiminy Cricket. Human conscience is part of our internal God-given mental capacity to determine right from wrong, or good from bad that aligns with our inner belief system.

Conscience is not a judge, lobbyist, or legislator as some believe. Here is what St. Paul has to say: “They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them” (Rom. 2:15). And, “I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit” (Rom. 9:1). Can you see it? We have a mental capacity that aligns with our belief system.

As such, there is nothing wrong with dialoguing with yourself. However, quite often the choice of right over wrong, or good over bad, emerges in our emotions. We feel a sense of calm and peace or well-being that does not conflict with our internal belief system. John MacArthur describes this as “a built-in warning system that signals us when something we have done is wrong. The conscience is to our souls what pain sensors are to our bodies: it inflicts distress, in the form of guilt, whenever we violate what our hearts tell us is right.”[2]

Second, conscience performs best when it is ruled by God.

What makes something a sin is not simply because it is out of alignment with our inner belief system, more so, it is not ruled by God. Our conscience is therefore only trustworthy when it does not override the rule of God. In a world of self-entitlement this can be a tough pill to swallow.  

For example, when we choose to violate what God created – not just in substance but in how creation functions – we sin. Marriage vows are easily broken when one or both parties slip on the deadly banana skin of lust in the form of viewing porn. Honoring mother and father can quickly cause their offspring to slip on the deadly banana skin of wrath especially if mom and dad divorced, ended up in jail, or abandoned said offspring. Quite often, respecting older people removes the deadly banana skin of envy especially when our elders have secured material possessions.

Respecting those in authority deals with the deadly banana skin of pride thinking we know better, and even if we do, the position is taken until we are elected or appointed. Caring for people who cannot care for themselves is the essence of true religion, ask James (1:27) removing the deadly banana skin of greed by using our own resources to help others. Rest from work is not the deadly banana skin of sloth but a reason to reenergize physically and spiritually. And, regarding gluttony, do I really need two large bacon sandwiches? Ouch, I just fell on my posterior (butt for American readers) after slipping on that deadly banana skin!   

Our conscience bears witness to the reality and truth of creation and the way it functions in balance or towards excess. A good gage for a healthy conscience is the shock and horror effect when we hear about this or that in the world. An immune conscience is evidence that God is possibly not ruling it.

Third, our conscience must be informed by Scripture both revealed and natural.  

Revealed is something the Holy Spirit does in our hearts and minds over time as we become more informed by Scripture. “This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds” (Heb. 10:16).[3] Natural is something observed in creation that points to the existence of God (Rom. 1:20). Our human conscience cannot be the final authority on anything because it is, unlike Scripture as God’s revealed and learned Word, susceptible to change.

There are countless times we reverse the order of things in an attempt to use our own conscience to actually judge God and his Word. For instance, have you heard people say, “I could not worship a God who would say that people who reject Him don’t go to heaven” or “I couldn’t believe in a God who would forgive a murderer if he truly repented.” In making such statements, people may be appealing to their own conscience, but in such cases, their consciences are not informed by Scripture and in danger of engaging deadly banana skins. 

There is nothing wrong with questioning the interpretation of Scripture, but our conscience can never legitimately judge a holy God or His holy Word. For example, when we find ourselves thinking “Did God really say?” we also find ourselves back in the Garden of Eden in conversation with a snake (Gen. 3:1).

Fourth, willfully acting against conscience is a guaranteed sin.

Our consciences are informed by what Scripture commands or forbids, or by what can be deduced as a principle from Scripture with good hermeneutical skills. In short, what has God said on a subject?

Well, imagine you are at the pub with a friend. You both have a drink then your friend excuses himself to use the bathroom (toilet for those British readers). In the meantime, another drink is brought to your table. Immediately you gulp down that drink thinking your friend purchased himself another beverage on his way to the loo (the bathroom for American readers). When your friend returns, he asks you if you have received the drink, he purchased for you!

Even though the drink was yours to enjoy, you are guilty of sin because you intended to do wrong thinking it was your friends’ beverage. You intended to take something that was not yours. The object of theft, the drink, is not the point, it was yours all along.

St. Paul said, “…and everything that does not come from faith is sin” (Rom. 14:23). R.C. Sproul comments on this verse saying, “If we do something that we think is sin, even if we are misinformed, we are guilty of sin. We are guilty of doing something we believe to be wrong. We act against our consciences. That is a very important principle.”[4]

As such, our conscience can excuse us when it should be accusing, and, accusing us when it should be excusing. There is a powerful principle at play here. People who are mature in the Christian faith whose conscience has been informed by Scripture over the years need to be a good example to those who are new to the Christian faith. The old adage, “They should know better” rings true here. I shall elaborate on this in another blog.  

Fifth, conscience can become immune through sin.

We all know how to create healthy habits – keep repeating something positive over and again until it becomes hard-wired into our character. However, the same is true for sin. Willful sin rejects the truth in Scripture, therefore the authority and rule of God over our lives. St. Paul gives us an example of what this looks like in its extreme. “Therefore, God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another” (Rom. 1:24).

In his letters, St. Paul never left an issue to linger like a vague philosophical concept. He names-names and points the finger, so his original audience know exactly who he is talking about. For example, in his first letter to Timothy, St. Paul points out people who taught lies as though it was truth.  “Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron” (1 Tim. 4:2).  

So, sin really does make the human conscience immune to sin itself. Ironically, the men that St. Paul referred to thought themselves wise among all men. How deluded! These men were flying horizontally through the air slipping on any of The Seven Deadly Banana Skins. This is why James tells us, “Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly” (James 3:1).

Oh, how I loathe the self-help and self-improvement teaching because it simply makes human behavior treatable. We have a desperate need to be saved, redeemed, delivered, and set free. It is the resurrected body and shed blood of Christ that makes this possible. I long to hear more teaching and preaching on the resurrected life and the power of Christ’ blood.

Nevertheless, I must curb my loathing, or I will be guilty of slipping on a deadly banana skin. For now, I have to send Jiminy Cricket back to the Blue Fairy. I cannot completely trust in what he has to say.

 

  

 

 

 

 

  

[1] Most reliable statisticians will note that malnutrition is the biggest killer in the world, and that death due to obesity complications is on a rapid increase.  

[2] John MacArthur. Called to Lead: 26 Leadership Lessons from the Life of the Apostle Paul. (Thomas Nelson 2004, 78).

[3] The author of Hebrews is quoting Jeremiah 31:33.

[4] R. C. Sproul in Joe Carter’s book, The Life and Faith Field Guide for Parents. (Harvest House 2019, 130).